Forum:Systematic approach
A while ago I watched the Roots of the Matrix documentary, which got me thinking about the best approach this Wiki should take, and what was unique to the Matrix that should shape our approach. Firstly, the Wachowskis really seemed to be trying to open people's minds with all sorts of allusions to philosophy, theology and culture which at the moment the Wiki has almost no coverage of. A lot of this leads to different responses and interpretations by each person who watches it, something which Wikis often try to minimise, even though it's really the whole point of most fiction. The Wachowskis have said that the reason they don't give their own interpretation is that it stifles other people's expression of this stuff, and most of all they want people to put forward their own views. *The main problem with this is subjectivity: who has the right to say which views deserve coverage, and which don't? If we allow absolutely any view, we open ourselves to vandalism, but if we start censoring then there are bound to be problems. Most wikis just delete all of this stuff outright (or relegate it to something like a "Trivia" section), but given the emphasis the creators have put on it, I think we need a better solution. :*There's probably no perfect way, but how about an "Interpretation" section on each page (or any page where there is an interpetation to be made). This could include any allusions that their names may contain (a mainstay of "Trivia", since it's almost never stated outright), interpretations in philosophy and religion, parallels in culture and so on. It could also be the place where the views given in all the secondary works (the books that analyse the films, the essays and commentaries that the Wachowskis commissioned etc.) could be recorded. But to really make it an open resource, and allow it to live up to its potential, I'd also say that people should be able add their own interpretations; I have a few ideas about how we could regulate and standardise this, but it's something that almost certainly needs more thought and discussion. Secondly, there's the question of "canon", which hasn't really been decided yet. There are lots of different approaches to this, and ways to define what "actually happened" in a fictional universe, but I think they mostly miss the point. Perhaps a better starting point is to examine what our sources are, from the films themselves (which reach us in different formats), and the games and comics, but also documentaries, interviews, scripts, books, articles and even to websites and forums (a critical resource for The Matrix Online, for example). *Once we've mapped out what there is out there, we can start dividing it in different ways: into primary and secondary sources, in-universe and out-of-universe, official and unofficial, serious and satire, medium by medium, by date of publication, and many more. We can also map out how they're interconnected. :*This would give us a great way to provide references, which are critical to wikis, not to mention providing a useful resource to anyone interested in the series. It would also allow us to begin what I'm calling the "systematic approach". The systematic approach is a way to make sure we've got everything that we should have here in the wiki. The basic idea is to go through the sources one at a time, and add what they tell us to the wiki; both in an article about the source (broken down into scene/chapter if necessary) to document and comment on what the sources say, and in the topic's article. To make it a wiki, we'd have to make sure we linked it together as we went, and provided the sourcing too. Once we'd gone through everything systematically, it would be a case of going through the articles to see what material was left unsourced, and either deleting it or dealing with it as appropriate. This may be a slow process, but I'm sure we'd get there eventually. Once we did it would have just about everything necessary, and in meantime the roadmap would serve as a useful starting point for new editors too. Within this, there are bound to be lots of different possible approaches and opinions, so please feel free to give your thoughts and ideas! --xensyriaT 13:00, November 16, 2012 (UTC)